Consider the fact that you are a byproduct of the endless programming and propaganda behind the War on Terror. If you have no doubts on that subject, YOU are wrong.
So, I'm endlessly programmed, therefore nazis are good?
You can critique the way we acquire information and use that to cast doubt on conclusions. But you definitely can not use those criticisms to add validity to any conclusions either. So I don't see how this world view does anybody any good.
At some point, you see nazis, you say "those are bad", and you just know you're right about it. In that sense, morals are a true compass when faced with endless doubt that can creep in if you want to be maximally scientific about things.
"Life is complicated and nobody wants to believe it. I suppose you might call it the infantilism of society. There is deep infantilism in the culture, in terms of the way they think, they can’t bear complexity. That you have to think, that there are gradations, nobody wants that. They want to be told, or they want to say: ‘This is good, this is bad’. Anything that in any way undermines that is not to be borne." - Stephen Fry
No pressing need to point out the obvious criticisms. Fry was already roundly criticized up and down for saying it. But it has become my favorite quote about the way people talk about ideologies.
I goal of killing and mistreating people of other races is morally wrong. You may mock me as someone who cant bear complexity for that, but that is just that - attempt to make me feel ashamed so that they have it easier.
I agree with you! But you've cherry-picked an issue that the majority of HN users agree with, so...
In this case, I would say that the nuance lies not in whether it is good or bad, but in understanding the constellation of factors that would lead someone to hold the objectionable viewpoint. Reducing the issue down to the question of whether it's good or bad is itself the simplistic mentality that Fry was very explicitly criticizing.
I cherry picked issue whole thread started with. That is not cherry picking, that is staying on topic.
There are plenty of reasons why one would be nazi. One is fear, other ressentment yet other that you was raised that way by parents. And yet others grown to be cruel, aggresive and sadistic and nazism makes them feel like it is good thing.
However, being clear on whether it is good or bad or even dangerous and what is cost of they get their way is practically speaking super important. Understanding that is more important then understanding poor them and having emphaty toward them. Otherwise they will use you emphaty to convert you to their case, bit by bit. It is not simplistic, it is values that you need to keep in mind lest you lose the lm.
Here, you are exploring nuance. I doubt it will cost anyone their life.
> However, being clear on whether it is good or bad or even dangerous and what is cost of they get their way is practically speaking super important.
Yes, it's important. It's important that children learn this, or sort it out by very early adulthood. That is what is meant by infantile. In my opinion, this is not a serious problem for the vast majority of civil folk. I do not understand the value in grown adults belaboring it. It's baby food. Eat grownup food.
Actually users flagged it, because it obviously breaks the site guidelines.
It doesn't matter what ideology you're battling for or against. It's the genre of ideological flamewar itself that's damaging here, and therefore unwelcome, and therefore will get you banned if you keep doing it.
Those rules are disingenuous, extensively ideologically partisan, and do not reflect the human condition at all. It's akin to taping a warning sign on a Skinner box that says, "Do not react" while the experimenters are perpetual baffled when subjects twitch when delivered a jolt of electricity.
By "the users", do you mean four or so hyperpartisan ideological zealots who exploit your rules to get their rush of moral supremacy by downvoting instead of commenting to refute the points?
Because downvoting is technically political activity and your rules totally allow that all day long.
You can critique the way we acquire information and use that to cast doubt on conclusions. But you definitely can not use those criticisms to add validity to any conclusions either. So I don't see how this world view does anybody any good.
At some point, you see nazis, you say "those are bad", and you just know you're right about it. In that sense, morals are a true compass when faced with endless doubt that can creep in if you want to be maximally scientific about things.